Rise of the 'Fetterman Republicans'?

At RealClear Politics, Frank Miele considers the possible cross-party, Reaganesque appeal of Pennsylvania Senator John Fetterman. Miele, a conservative, concedes that he doesn't agree with many of the Senator's positions, but notes:

He is one of the few U.S. senators of either party who seems to follow his conscience instead of party bosses, and he speaks with simple straightforward authenticity that is sadly lacking among almost all elected officials.

That last would come as a welcome break from Trump's bombast, rambling, and thin-skinned touchiness. But more important, while some of Fetterman's positions -- such as his acceptance of "climate change" catastrophism -- concern me, Fetterman seems like a reasonable person, who has changed (and would change) his mind when confronted by facts or solid arguments:

On quite a few issues, Fetterman has planted himself firmly on the side of reason and tradition. He supports Israel's right to defend itself 100 percent, and reminds his radical colleagues that Hamas started the Gaza war and has only itself to blame for the deadly outcome. Likewise Fetterman enthusiastically supported President Trump's decision to decimate Iran's nuclear capability with a bombing sortie that left no doubt that Trump would follow up his words with actions. In both cases, Fetterman angered his fellow Democrats and won new supporters among Republicans.

On other issues, he has staked out a position as a sensible reformer. Originally against fracking, for instance, he has moderated his position to acknowledge the importance of fracking for keeping energy prices low, but insists on environmental protections being in place. Perfect position for an independent.

...

Most of his positions ... fall on the same side as the majority of Americans. His support for abortion rights may rankle many Republican politicians, but polling shows that most people agree with him that abortion is a choice "between a woman, her doctor and a God if she prays to one."

Miele partly addresses the concerns of people like me who view Fetterman with skepticism, given his "progressive" past: Some of Fetterman's positions have since become mainstream, and he has changed his mind about some. (In my mind, while the former isn't ideal, in that it would thwart efforts to walk back from them, it also means less new damage would likely come from his support for those positions than if they weren't already mainstream.

Miele's column is thought-provoking without being Pollyanna-ish about what supporting Fetterman would entail for Republicans and right-leaning (or formerly right-leaning) voters, and he ends fittingly:

Maybe no one's calling themselves a Fetterman Republican yet, but as the rest of the politicians beclown themselves over the next year, I suspect they will.

Given that Donald Trump and the MAGA swamp are completely discrediting the party that let them take it over, normal Americans need to give serious thought to which Democrat might be his best or least-bad successor.

Trump is otherwise paving the way for a President Ocasio-Cortez or worse.

-- CAV

Freedom Four

A Friday Hodgepodge

1. "I'm Argentinian, and Milei's Victory Is Welcome News," by Agustina Vergara Cid (Orange County Register):

I don't think people originally elected Milei because they suddenly embraced free markets, but because the alternative was leading Argentina down Venezuela's path, and the electorate reacted to that. He was the leader most drastically opposed to the status quo.

While his overwhelming victory in the midterms is still largely due to the rejection of Peronism, a new and important factor is that Milei has shown people that freedom works. After decades of being told that economic freedom would ruin them, people have experienced first-hand that that is not the case. People have seen the economy stabilize, investors eye Argentina again, and can operate in a much steadier economic environment. They've also welcomed Milei's crackdown on crime.

760 words/3 minutes

2. "The President Has No 'Foreign Policy' Discretion to Impose Sweeping Global Tariffs," by Ben Bayer (Orange County Register):

Whatever the trade restrictions in wars that were part of the president's genuine foreign policy power, they applied only to trade with belligerent or occupied nations and only for the duration of the war. Contrast that with Trump's tariffs: in the name of "foreign policy," President Trump is, in effect, declaring economic "war" against the entire world, enemies and allies alike. But a real American foreign policy does recognize allies, like the United Kingdom and Canada.

The idea that the president is due some deference to manage his sweeping global tariffs in the name of "foreign policy" is a complete sham.

The IEEPA simply cannot give the president the power to impose a new global tariff scheme. Congress alone has the constitutional power to tax and to regulate foreign commerce, and it cannot delegate this power to the president in such unlimited fashion.

900 words/3 minutes

3. "LTE: How American Capitalism Can Be Great Again," (PDF) by Onkar Ghate (Wall Street Journal):

The signers of the Declaration of Independence weren't akin to today's progressives searching for their next handout or today's conservatives devoted to faith, family and tradition. They were radicals, steeped in Enlightenment thought. It's called the American experiment because they were consciously inventing something new.

Much as they sought to separate church from state, they wanted to separate economy from state too. The new American government stripped the state of much of its power to enforce ideological orthodoxy or suppress dissenting views. Likewise, it was stripped of much of its power to pick economic winners and losers...

260 words/1 minute

4. "What Trump Is Doing Is Not 'State Capitalism,' It's Just Statism," by Agustina Vergara Cid (Orange County Register):

Building on precedent, the Trump administration is making it even more transparent that the federal government has massive power over businesses, and this is antithetical to capitalism. In the mixed economy we're in (a mix of control and freedom), the Trump administration is rapidly taking us closer to more controls (statism), not freedom (capitalism).

Those of us who defend capitalism should reject terms like "state capitalism" and not fall for this conceptual trap. When the statist approach inevitably fails (including by further restricting the freedom of Americans) capitalism should not be blamed for it, including because we'll get even more controls if that happens.

760 words/3 minutes

-- CAV

Winter Is Coming

Authoritarianism Surfaces in an Advice Column

Over at Ask a Manager is a post titled "What to Do if ICE Agents Come to Your Workplace." It is sad to have to say this as an American, but I highly recommend reading it and perusing the comments. Both contain information that can be helpful to individuals concerned about being arbitrarily detained.

You or someone you care about might need it.

Alison Green notes one reason one needn't be in management to be concerned:

As an employee, you may be more limited, especially if management isn't supportive. Many places, especially large corporations, are adopting a neutral position towards ICE's activities, which effectively means letting them operate unchecked. Employees can leave Know Your Rights (KYR) info in staff areas for people to take. Try to get in touch with your local ICE Watch or immigrant rights groups as well. Many of them are sending out alerts when ICE is active in a particular area, so you can be aware if they're near your place of business. [bold added]

On top of the value of the post itself are some of the comments, such as this one:

One of the executives at the hospital I work for has spoken out to the employees about being personally 'asked for papers' multiple times by masked agents. He is Latino but is US-born and has a distinctly Chicago accent. He carries not only his Real ID but also his passport. However, a former colleague in DC had his passport confiscated by ICE even though he is American, so you may prefer to carry the passport card instead if that is a concern.

Having your identification doesn't necessarily establish for them that you are an American. A number of cases have involved ICE hauling off someone even though they are screaming that they are a citizen and have ID. Some people have not been released for several hours or days. Another coworker disclosed that her US-born son was swept up in a raid while delivering groceries and not released for a couple days.

If you may be at risk, memorize a phone number you can call for assistance, like a legal representative or someone who can find one for you. In our time of cell phones you want something you can access when you don't have yours. (During protests, generally using a permanent marker to write it on your arm is recommended.) Keep your emergency contact person updated at your workplace, if you haven't already. [bold added]

Other commenters offer additional sources of advice or assistance, such as for non-work settings or for specific locales that have better warning and assistance measures than most.

-- CAV

Two Partisans on the Elections

My quick take on last week's elections was borderline Ho-hum.

Has that take, such as it is, aged well?

It's a fair question, given that Democrats now have legislative supermajorities in Virginia and New Jersey (and ended a Republican one in Mississippi).

After considering analyses by Republican Sean Trende and "Liberal Patriot" Michael Baharaeen, I'd say pretty well, but there are warning signs that a sane Republican Party would not ignore.

Baharaeen does a bit of a deep dive, but from the perspective of a chastened partisan, as his preamble states in part:

It's also imperative to be clear-eyed about these results and honest about what we do and don't know. It wasn't that long ago that Democrats learned the wrong lessons in victory and it cost them. So today, I will offer some assorted thoughts from the latest elections, including examining dominant narratives that have emerged since Tuesday night and determining how much stock to put in them. [bold added, link removed]

Trende is similarly level-headed:

When assessing election results, the analyses that hold up over time are the ones that avoid the hair-on-fire takes that dominate the news cycle in the immediate aftermath. That's because elections are pretty complex and rarely lend themselves to black-and-white interpretations. Tuesday, however, was not one of those days... [bold added]

Baharaeen's analysis tackles the problem Trende points to about elections being hard to to interpret, while still teasing out a signal this pro-freedom author wishes either party would listen to.

On learning about the supermajorities in Virginia and New Jersey, I was a little bit surprised even though these are both overall blue states, but Baharaeen notes the different composition of the off-year electorate (which skewed Democratic), which makes the supermajorities seem less surprising, and then notes the following:

It may not have been decisive, but marginal shifts in support from right-of-center voters appeared to give both Sherrill and Spanberger a boost, a sign that persuasion was a key part of their path to victory rather than turnout alone.

Persuasion! What a nice change of pace from Trust that this incoherent, doddering lunatic will know best!

Similarly, I suspect, shifts in Hispanic voters away from Trump, might reflect the negative quasi-persuasion one might expect from Trump's nativist policies. Regarding that, Liberal Patriot cautions against suggestions from his side of the aisle that Democrats seem to have suddenly fixed their issues with these voters.

Trende, whom I've dismissed as a Trumpist in the past, would seem receptive to the above signal:

Americans don't do mandates. Donald Trump's claim to a sweeping mandate was always dubious. He won by a little less than two points and failed to clear 50% of the vote. But I've always been fond of political scientist E.E. Schattschneider's view of things: "The people are a sovereign whose vocabulary is limited to 'yes' or 'no.'" We read all sorts of things into election results because it's our job. But "the people" only say "I prefer this candidate" or "I like that one." They don't really get to explain why, nor in most elections do they get to rank preferences. [bold added]

Yes. Trump going hog-wild on (1) a crackpot tariff agenda that most voters disapprove of, (2) rounding up and mistreating people who "look like immigrants" in open contempt for due process, (3) open corruption, and on and on and on might well piss off voters who -- neither enamored of socialism nor of Trump -- just wanted an end to Biden's bad policies and abuses of power.

Both analysts can take a hint and both seem to understand that there are large pools of persuadable voters who don't want what the fanatical bases of their respective parties want.

It would behoove both parties to reflect on the fact that large numbers of American voters are disgruntled, to ask what they might be disgruntled about, to consider what each party is doing in common to make things worse, and to ask what politicians from America's past (when it built the groundwork for prosperity) might have done differently.

I am pessimistic this will happen, but a few hints: (1) spend a lot less of our money, (2) take less of our money in taxes, and (3) order us around much less. This list isn't exhaustive, nor have I essentialized it, but it would be a fine start.

-- CAV

Three Cheers for the Washing Machine!

MSN has picked up a piece about washing machines from the Good News newsletter, a subsidiary of Vox that I'd never heard of.

This one is well worth the read and definitely one to keep in mind the next time someone sneers about household appliances being mere "conveniences."

A good taste of the article comes from its discussion of a fact that might surprise many of those unknowingly liberated naysayers in the West.

Four billion people worldwide have to hand-wash their clothes:

Hand-washing isn't a quaint throwback; it's a time sink and a health risk, one overwhelmingly borne by women and girls. Time-use data gathered by TWMP [The Washing Machine Project --ed] in multiple countries is brutal. In Kampala, Uganda, people reported spending an average of 147 minutes per load -- nearly 13 hours a week. In refugee communities in the Republic of the Congo, it was 149 minutes per load, with some women spending 20 to 24 hours each week on laundry alone. All that time displaces hours that could be spent in school, on making money, on caregiving, and even just on resting.

Hand-washers in these countries don't just have to do the laundry -- often, they need to find the water themselves. In the Ugandan capital of Kampala, hand-washing used about 14 gallons per load. In Mexico, measured use reached 16 to 53 gallons -- far more water than might be used for drinking alone. Fetching that water can be dangerous. Surveys in refugee camps in Greece found 35 percent of respondents feared harassment or theft during collection, while those in the Congo named risks from robbery to gender-based violence.

Then, there's the back-breaking nature of the work itself. In a refugee camp on the Greek island of Lesvos, 87 percent of people reported physical pain from washing clothes -- hands and backs for all, legs for most -- plus skin damage and injuries from rough tools. [bold added, links omitted]

The article notes earlier that women did most of the clothes washing before the advent of the washing machine in the West. The washing machine and other time-saving machines and innovations resulted in such enormous time savings that America effectively doubled its labor force as women were able to pursue more meaningful and profitable work.

The West is in some ways a victim of its own success. Most people here have no clue how difficult their lives would be without such machines, which too many take for granted.

The next time someone natters about the "laziness" caused by these mere "conveniences," know that that person needs liberation of another kind. You may not be able to cure them of a propensity for pearl-clutching, but you can help them break the chains of ignorance about this topic by mentioning some of the facts from this informative and engaging piece.

-- CAV

Over 170 Americans Held by Immigration

"The government doesn't track how many citizens are held by immigration agents," ProPublica notes ahead reporting that it has determined that over 170 American citizens have been detained by immigration authorities under the Trump Administration.

ProPublica's highlights show inexcusable degrees of callousness, incompetence, and contempt for the right to due process:

• Americans Detained: The government doesn't track how many citizens are held by immigration agents. We found more than 170 cases this year where citizens were detained at raids and protests.
• Held Incommunicado: More than 20 citizens have reported being held for over a day without being able to call their loved ones or a lawyer. In some cases their families couldn't find them.
• Cases Wilted: Agents have arrested about 130 Americans, including a dozen elected officials, for allegedly interfering with or assaulting officers, yet those cases were often dropped.

Can you imagine being picked up for no good reason and not even getting to tell your family what happened?

You won't need to after reading the full report, which includes the story of George Retes, a combat veteran, whose commute to work abruptly ended with him being detained incommunicado for three days -- one of which was his daughter's third birthday:

"They broke his window, they pepper sprayed him, they grabbed him, threw him on the floor," his sister told a reporter between sobs. "We don't know what to do. We're just asking to let my brother go. He didn't do anything wrong. He's a veteran, disabled citizen. It says it on his car."

Retes was held for three days without being given an opportunity to make a call. His family only learned where he had been after his release. His leg had been cut from the broken glass, Retes told ProPublica, and lingering pepper spray burned his hands. He tried to soothe them by filling sandwich bags with water.

Retes recalled that agents knew he was a citizen. "They didn't care." He said one DHS official laughed at him, saying he shouldn't have come to work that day. "They still sent me away to jail." He added that cases like his show [Brett] Kavanaugh was "wrong completely."

DHS did not answer our questions about Retes. It did respond on X after Retes wrote an op-ed last month in the San Francisco Chronicle. An agency post asserted he was arrested for assault after he "became violent and refused to comply with law enforcement." Yet Retes had been released without any charges. Indeed, he says he was never told why he was arrested. [bold added, links omitted]

Retes and others are suing the federal government, as reported by ProPublica and the web site for the Institute for Justice:

George Retes, a U.S. citizen and Iraq War veteran, was detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and other federal agencies for three days and three nights. During that time, he was denied access to an attorney, was not allowed to make a phone call, was not presented to a judge, and was put in an isolation cell. He missed his daughter's third birthday. He was never charged with a crime.

Now, George has taken steps to sue the U.S. government under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) for his unconstitutional detention -- by submitting claims to the federal agencies involved. George is represented by the Institute for Justice (IJ), a nonprofit public interest law firm that recently won an FTCA case at the U.S. Supreme Court.

"I'm calling out the federal government not just for what they did to me, but for what they are doing to others," said George. "I'm continuing to fight for this country, now as a civilian."

I thank Retes and the others and wish them well, and hope to do my part by making their stories known to others.

Forget about the numbskulls who like whatever Trump does, and the nativist and racist losers who will enjoy these stories. There are countless people out there who -- not being obsessed with politics, and misinformed about immigration from every direction by news media -- could understandably think that Trump is doing a good job on immigration. These are the people who need to hear about this, because these are the people Trump is counting on to continue getting away with his abuses of power.

-- CAV

Four Neat Things

A Friday Hodgepodge

I am in a hurry to head up to Mississippi this morning to join my brothers and mother to celebrate her 80th birthday!

Mom carefully encouraged my bookishness when I was growing up, cautioning me against a tendency to over-generalize and sometimes joking about my propensity to collect "useless" information or my great interest in maps. Of the last two counts, I am still guilty as charged.

Happy Birthday, Mom, and this collection of useless (but neat!) information that I mostly found on my phone while out on walks (Yes, I still do that, too.) is dedicated to you. (I hope a few of my readers will also enjoy them, of course.)

Most parents in Mississippi, especially the way it was back then, wouldn't have given me the kind of freedom I needed to grow. Thank you, Mom!

***

1. At Ask a Manager, Alison Green once again curates a madcap collection of office war stories battle tales shenanigans, this time about the territory reportedly under that job description phrase other duties as assigned.

This one reminds me of Mom, who passed along her love of cats to me:

We had an office cat named Baconfingers. She belonged to an employee who passed away, so folks had a lot of affection for her. When I was hired, I was told that if she wanted attention, I was allowed to stop working and give her scritches for up to 15 minutes, and to code that time under office management.

Most of the time, Baconfingers roosted on top of a filing cabinet, but occasionally she would just make her rounds around the office, going from desk to desk getting scritches from different people in 15 minute increments.

My favorite, "the lost ear," reminds me of the British comedies Mom introduced me to, but is a little on the gory side.

2. I mentioned maps earlier, so here's a fun collection of 19 World Maps in the Styles of Famous Artists.

On the nostalgia front, this one also reminds me of my Dad (also a great parent), who was locally famous for the watercolors he painted on the side.

3. Speaking of artists, sidelines, and maps (or at least highways), this story is about a clever artist who addressed his frustration with an inadequate highway sign -- by posing as a CalTrans maintenance worker and adding some missing information to that sign:

[Richard Ankrom] spent more than three months preparing, researching the color and shape of the signs, mixing his own custom paint to get the colors just right, and applying a bit of faux patina to finish it off. Ankrom even spent time tracking down the button-shaped reflectors used on other legitimate signs and convincing the supplier to give him some. Once he was satisfied that it looked authentic, he came up with a plan to install it.

At first, the artist wanted to dress in black and install the sign under the cloak of darkness. He instead decided if what he was doing was truly in the name of the public's wellbeing that it should be done in broad daylight. So that's exactly what he did, complete with a hard hat and reflective vest that he bought from Home Depot.

Ankrom eventually leaked word of his sign-editing escapade to the press, and when the time came to replace the sign, the new one included his improvements.

(I'll set aside the moral and legal problems inherent in this action today, and note with relief that this was so difficult to carry out that I doubt someone with bad intentions would have the ability or inclination to pull off something like this.)

4. It's information-dense and very Web 1.0, but today's search of my bookmarks yielded something that might make a few hours' interesting reading: How Intelligent Are Cats?, which is part of a larger, non-academic site maintained by cat fancier Sarah Hartwell.

Not having yet read this, I am optimistic that it would be worthwhile between some initial sampling and the author's bio:

My best academic subjects had always been biology and genetics. I started studying genetics when I was 12 or 13 and have continued study the subject ever since - that's over 40 years of genetics study, 35 years of which centred on cat genetics. I started off working in hospital laboratories and despite an aptitude for medical sciences, I opted for a career in the better-paid fields software engineering, got a BSc (Hons) in that field, and then moved into quality assurance (which had the added benefit of not involving animal experimentation). Although I worked in engineering, I continued studying biology, genetics and cat behaviour as a hobby. I corresponded with behaviourists and geneticists and went to veterinary and behavioural lectures and conferences where my early medical background provided an understanding of the jargon. Had the fields of domestic animal genetics or pet behavioural studies existed when I was at school, my career path would have been much easier.

That noted, here's a sample:

Sacha Scofield [personal correspondence] suggests an alternative view on feline self awareness. She suggests that the mirror test does not accommodate the different mindsets of social and non-social subjects. The supposition is that cats lose interest in their reflection in the mirror because it appears to be another cat which doesn't interact with the subject. Sacha believes that cats understand mirrors to be reflections of the real world, and that they will use mirrors to observe objects that ... are out of their line of sight. Sacha has observed her own cats apparently watching each other, and watching their owner, via a mirror. In some cases, the cat has met the eyes of its owner in the reflection and meowed a greeting, demonstrating recognition of the image. After moving house, the older cat (15 year old Flossy) used the mirror more frequently to observe other household members. She can see from the lounge to the bedroom and vice versa using the mirror. She also uses it to observe me in bed, usually when she wants attention. She seems the use the mirror to compensate for her deafness [i.e.] detecting whether another cat is approaching from behind.

Interesting indeed, but for another day.

Time to go!

-- CAV